Arguments for "Young Earth"/Creationism and against evolution and carbon dating...thoughts?

I regularly post pieces on my Facebook page that address my non-belief, wherein I discuss my views on various topics relating to religion and atheism; since I have as many (if not more) friends who are believers as are non-believers, these posts invariable become debates on topics like Creationism vs. Evolution and why the Bible is a ridiculous book--both as a foundation for morality and as a reliable historical source--for anyone to follow. The responses I get on either side of the argument range from the intelligent to the patently absurd. It's always fun and interesting, though.

More likely than not, most of you have encountered the same arguments and protests from believers that I often do from my believer friends in these debates.

Here's where I'm interested in your input and insights:

When a non-believer comes at you with claims such as "there is in fact evidence that dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time", or that "carbon (and other forms of) dating are grossly unreliable and inaccurate"--or any of the myriad arguments that evolution is bullshit--how do YOU reply?

I haven't encountered too many who are that ignorant, usually when they find out I'm athiest they stop talking about the subject. Hopefully this is because more and more people deep down are becoming skeptical and they don't want to hear anything to sway them from their faith. I doubt it, but hey, I can dream can't I?

Personally, as amusing as the debates between myself and a person of faith can be, I find it rather impossible to swap ideals with someone whos entire belief system is based of of "faith"..

See, no matter what proof, that is or isnt quite backed by SCEINTIFIC evidence that we may whip out to discuss our atheist view points, they still believe that this warm and fuzzy feeling they get inside of them after reading another fairytale scripture is they're proof of God's exsistance.. As long as they have "faith" in all the fairytales they read in their bible, nothing else matters.. Faith always beats legitamate reasoning backed by scientific research and evidence.. when you believe..

Interesting how they have no problem with carbon dating when it comes to this piece of wood they think is Noah's ark.

To answer your question, I would generally go over some facts, like how there are multiple measurements of dating things, etc. But the truth is they don't care, they don't want to hear it, so I don't bother, I'll tell them to read a book. I can't be bothered talking to people who don't listen.

99.9pc certainty' of Noah's Ark discovery on Mount Ararat
CHINESE and Turkish evangelical explorers believe they may have found Noah's Ark - 4000m up a mountain in Turkey.

The team said it had recovered wooden specimens from a structure on Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey that carbon dating proved was 4800 years old, around the same time the ark is said to have been afloat.

"It's not 100 per cent that it is Noah's Ark but we think it is 99.9 per cent that this is it," said Yeung Wing-cheung, a Hong Kong documentary filmmaker and member of the 15-strong team from Noah's Ark Ministries International.

The structure had several compartments, some with wooden beams, which were believed to house animals, he said.

The group of evangelical archaeologists ruled out an established human settlement on the grounds that one had never been found above 3500m in the vicinity, Mr Yeung said.

Local Turkish officials would ask the central government in Ankara to apply for UNESCO World Heritage status so the site could be protected while a major archaeological dig was conducted, he added.

The biblical story says God decided to flood the earth after seeing how corrupt it had become, and told Noah to build an ark and fill it with two of every animal species.

After the flood waters receded, the Bible says, the ark came to rest on a mountain. Many believe that Mount Ararat, the highest point in the region, is where the ark and her inhabitants came aground.

===========================================

if you want a real explanation then in blind tests samples have been sent to various carbon dating labs round the world they have a 99% accuracy rate. ( samples from the same piece of material were sent to different labs and all the labs gave the same result + or - a few percent 99% of the time. )

If the system was flawed then these results would have fluctuated wildly all of the time.

I feel obligated to give them no more evidence than they give me. To be honest it gets tiring, after a while, to try to reason with someone who refuses to acknowledge my word definitions, argument, empirical evidence, or even consider the propositions I propose. If someone refuses to even imagine the possibility of no god there is little point trying to argue for it. See my blog post on how I initiate a debate with a theist.

It is true that arguing with these people is pointless, except some times as a latter day verbal version of the Colosseum. However even the Creation Ministries site (formally Answers in Genesis) allowed for Carbon-14 date to be accurate for up to 12,000 years. Which still would seem to present some problems. If you haven't then you should read `The Greatest Show on Earth' by Richard Dawkins and `The Demon Haunted World:Science as a candle in the dark' by Carl Sagan. Both are very easy to read (I've just finished the latter) and give you the stuff you need. Sagan also deals with UFO, pseudoscience and new age stuff to boot.